Gustav Thiel : Rugby
Louis Luyt will win the battle for the presidency of the South African Rugby Football Union (Sarfu) because he ‘bought the loyalty of the smaller unions’. But there is hope for rugby fans in the country who feel that Morne du Plessis is the sport’s messiah: he will oppose Luyt in the future.
Although Du Plessis told the Mail & Guardian this week that he could not commit to a future in rugby administration, he did not exclude it as a possibility. A high- placed source in Western Province rugby, however, said this week that privately Du Plessis has been saying that he will oppose Luyt if he wins next week’s election.
When ordinary rugby pundits say Luyt is a certainty to retain his presidency, it is fair to ascribe some doubt to their opinions. But if the man willing to go out on a limb with such a prediction is none other than Luyt’s strongest opponent for the presidency, Natal Rugby Union (NRU) president Keith Parkinson, the rugby fraternity will take note.
This week, in a startling vote of no confidence in his own candidacy, Parkinson admitted to the Mail & Guardian that Luyt will win the battle to once again rule rugby in this country. His reason: “Luyt shrewdly won the loyalty of the smaller unions in South African rugby and therefore I don’t think I stand a realistic chance.”
The election takes place on Tuesday at 9pm in the boardroom of the Western Province Rugby Football Union (WPRFU) at Newlands in Cape Town. In total about 40 delegates – two each from the 14 provinces, 11 members of the executive committee of Sarfu and one from South African schools rugby – will each cast one vote for either Luyt, Parkinson or Mluleki George, the current senior vice-president of Sarfu. George is also the president of the Border Rugby Football Union (BRFU) and president of the National Sports Congress (NSC).
Parkinson denied rumours that he was opposing Luyt with George as a deliberate attempt to undermine Luyt’s chances. “That would not make sense, because it would simply strengthen Luyt’s hand,” he said.
The unions involved in the election are Natal, Western Province, Gauteng Lions, Northern Transvaal, Free State, Eastern Province, Boland, South Western Districts, Border, Northern Free State, Griqualand West, North West, Gauteng Falcons and Mpumalanga.
According to Steven Roos, a Sarfu administrator, the constitution of the union stipulates that the presidents of all unions who are not members of the executive committee could be co-opted before the elections, which could increase the number of delegates. Ronnie Masson, the Western Province president, has already been co- opted in this fashion. Masson is a vocal opponent of Luyt and has expressed his support for Parkinson in the past.
Parkinson announced his candidature on October 13, in effect saying he did not believe George was the right person to oppose Luyt. At the time, George said he would step down as a candidate “if it was in the interests of South African rugby”. George added that he was “not desperate to be president”.
But George has since changed his mind, believing that Luyt’s handling of the Browde Commission of Inquiry into the game ordered by Sports Minister Steve Tshwete could split the game. “His contempt for the commission could harm the game beyond repair,” George said. Luyt said in an affidavit to the commission that Tshwete was unhappy with the fact that rugby was run by white Afrikaners and that was the reason why the commission was appointed. Luyt has since denied allegations about his belief that the commission owes its existence to racism on Tshwete’s part.
Parkinson decided to join the race after being approached by “several of the bigger unions”. His decision was also based on the fact that Natal is involved in a legal battle with Sarfu about the future composition of South Africa’s regional Super 12 teams.
Natal alleged in an affidavit submitted to the Cape High Court on September 22 that Sarfu, under the guidance of Luyt and his son-in-law, Sarfu CEO Rian Oberholzer, took the Super 12 decision without consulting the major provinces.
Oberholzer maintains that the composition of Super 12 teams was fully debated at a meeting of Sarfu’s executive, but Natal’s CEO, Brian van Zyl, accused Oberholzer of “manufacturing the truth”.
Van Zyl and Parkinson both claim that Luyt and Oberholzer structured the Super 12 to give smaller unions a chance to have players participate in the competition. Parkinson believes Luyt bought the loyalty of the smaller unions in this way, which will assure his victory in Tuesday’s election.
All three candidates claim that they have the best interest of South African rugby at heart. Parkinson and George have been vocal about their intentions to further the development of rugby in the country. Luyt is adamant that his record speaks for itself, including the winning of the World Cup.
But Luyt has been quiet about his contributions to the development of the game. This week, he refused to answer any questions about his presidency and chances in Tuesday’s elections. His only reply: “The press only writes awful articles about me”.
Only Parkinson has been vocal in his criticism of Luyt’s contribution to the development of the game. “He only has the interests of Sarfu and consequently his own at heart,” said Parkinson.
Even Du Plessis, who privately admits that the development of the game is in a shambles, told the Mail & Guardian this week that he was hesitant to critisise Luyt. “I don’t believe in criticising when you are standing on the sidelines, but in getting involved and doing something about the situation.”
But rugby officials at grassroots level say development is indeed largely being overlooked by Sarfu. Achmat Esau, a Western Province rugby administrator and teacher at the Schotsche Kloof Primary School in Cape Town’s Bo-Kaap where rugby amongst the so- called coloured community originated, says underprivileged players are still overlooked.
“I am involved with rugby at grass roots level and know that basically nothing is being done for poor players. It is all very well for the national team to include players like Breyton Paulse, Dale Sandton and McNeil Hendricks, but still no real money is being spent on developing the game.
“People like Edward Griffiths wanted development to take shape, but Luyt is always against this. I think I should be the first person to say to Luyt’s face that he is a racist and is damaging the image of rugby beyond repair,” said Esau.
Although Parkinson is less vehement in his criticism of Luyt, he feels that his opposition to the Sarfu president will at least show that rugby administrators in the country are not united behind the Gauteng Lions president. “Maybe I will not win this time, but we will get rid of Luyt eventually”.
Many rugby lovers believe Du Plessis is the only man who can restore the image of South African rugby internationally. Ex-Springbok centre Wilf Rosenberg this week pointedly said Du Plessis is the only man with the poise and standing within the international rugby fraternity to “restore the pride of South African rugby”.
Du Plessis admitted in an interview with the Mail & Guardian that he is painfully aware of the pressure on him to become involved in the administration of the game. He gained kudos for his handling of the Springbok team in the previous World Cup as manager and has been implored ever since to become more involved in the game.
For the moment, Du Plessis says he is satisfied with his current involvement in the game. He manages the Chris Burger Fund and is in charge of the Sports Science Institute at Newlands.
“To be honest, I am not considering a career in rugby administration in the immediate future, but it is certainly not a possibility that I will ever exclude,” Du Plessis said. However, the Western Province administrator said that privately Du Plessis’s integrity will probably compel him to oppose Luyt in future.
When that will be only the rugby gods can tell, but for the moment, it seems certain that Louis Luyt, the gigantic ex-Free State lock, turned businessman, turned ruler of South African rugby, will once again assume his throne on Tuesday, silencing all his critics with the power of democratic elections. ends
BLURB: Moment of unity has been lost